Why should we all pay for the Music Industry?

In the middle of all Tweets on DigitalBritain, HADOPI, Loppsi and other tentative of control and internet censorship from Spain (1) to France (2) or UK passing by the worst dictatorship scheme envisaged in Italy (3), ‘une lueur d’espoir’, a gleam of hope.

In Monday View: The copyright crackdownCharles Dunstone, CEO TalkTalk Group

From the mouth of, or actually the pen of, Charles Dunstone, CEO TalkTalk Group, la parole Sage – the wise word, to make me so proud of being a TalkTalk customer:

Commenting the Digital Economy Bill supported by the UK Government, Charles Dunstone reinforce his opposition to the Bill by stating:

“The Digital Economy Bill is one of the few pieces of legislation the government is actively pushing through parliament before an election is called.”

He won’t tergiversate, for him, the bill is one of

“…the most dangerous and misguided legislation to have come before parliament in recent years.

…sets out to tackle online copyright infringement – frequently referred to as ‘illegal peer-to-peer file- sharing’ – in order to support Britain’s creative industries.

There is no doubt that some people do use the internet to watch films and listen to music without paying. TalkTalk does not condone or encourage copyright infringement, but I believe that the government’s proposals are disproportionate, impractical and deeply unprincipled”.

Though not encouraging copyright infringement, he states:

“I believe that the government’s proposals are disproportionate, impractical and deeply unprincipled”.

He crticizes the abusive presumption of fraud that weight on users.

“…the Bill effectively gives music labels and film studios the right to instruct internet service providers, such as TalkTalk, to cut off the internet connection of anyone that the labels and studios suspect of copyright infringement.

Consider this: if the police want to disconnect someone they suspect of viewing child pornography they have to apply to a court first and prove guilt. The Digital Economy Bill, in effect, casts people who download music without paying for it as a more urgent menace to society than people who view images of child abuse.

He then challenges the methods of censorship:

“We know many broadband customers caught up in this Orwellian nightmare will be innocent since the detection method cannot establish the individual who is file-sharing. It can only identify the connection, which many – including the unauthorised – can use.”

Reminds the case of innocent customers abused by lawyers victim of hijacking of their broadband connection rescued by the consumer group Which?

I share his views on that and have been blogged earlier on the technical limits of such regulation. The remarks equally apply to the French HADOPI law.

Yes, file-sharers can easily avoid detection using Wi-Fi hijacking and a growing array of other tools and applications, it will be innocent broadband customers who suffer the consequences of this nightmare.

Yes, it is the music and film industry the real beneficiaries of these measures.

Yes, the cost of tackling the problem will be massive – maybe hundreds of millions of pounds a year.

Yes: who foots this bill? The music and film companies? Not a chance. You will pay for it – an extra £2 per month on your broadband bill, according toBT.

…the cost of copyright protection plus the socalled ‘phone tax’ will jointly add about £30 per year to broadband bills.

Demand modelling shows this could make internet access unaffordable for 600,000 hard-pressed families. So much for the government’s claimed commitment to ‘digital inclusion’.

And yes,

“The creative industries’ arguments are phoney and the government’s response will turn our digital economy into a disaster zone.

More than 31,000 people have registered their opposition to these absurd proposals by signing our petition on the Number 10 website. You can also sign at www.dontdisconnect.us.”